From: Feasibility of individual patient data meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery
Characteristics | Data sharing requesta (n = 263) | P value | |
---|---|---|---|
n (%) | |||
Positive response | Negative or no response | ||
37 (14%) | 226 (86%) | ||
RCT characteristics | |||
Study design | 0.07 | ||
Single-centre (n = 176) | 19 (11%) | 157 (89%) | |
Multicentre (n = 57) | 11 (19%) | 46 (81%) | |
Not reported (n = 30) | 7 (23%) | 23 (77%) | |
Location | 0.11 | ||
Europe (n = 105) | 20 (19%) | 85 (81%) | |
North America (n = 71) | 9 (13%) | 62 (87%) | |
Asia (n = 78) | 6 (8%) | 72 (92%) | |
Australia and New Zealand (n = 9) | 2 (22%) | 7 (78%) | |
Funding | 0.19 | ||
Public (n = 91) | 8 (9%) | 83 (91%) | |
Privateb (n = 45) | 7 (16%) | 38 (84%) | |
No response (n = 127) | 22 (17%) | 105 (83%) | |
Year of publication | 0.57 | ||
2000–2004 (n = 44) | 4 (9%) | 40 (91%) | |
2005–2009 (n = 109) | 16 (15%) | 93 (85%) | |
2010–2013 (n = 110) | 17 (15%) | 93 (85%) | |
Journal of publication characteristics | |||
Journal of publication | 0.68 | ||
Specialized (n = 251) | 35 (14%) | 216 (86%) | |
Generalist (n = 12) | 2 (17%) | 10 (83%) | |
Journal data sharing policies | 0.27 | ||
Yes (support or mandatory) (n = 30) | 2 (7%) | 28 (93%) | |
No (n = 233) | 35 (15%) | 198 (85%) | |
Top 10 impact factor in each specialty | 0.21 | ||
Yes (n = 117) | 20 (17%) | 97 (83%) | |
No (n = 146) | 17 (12%) | 129 (88%) |